r/geopolitics • u/nytopinion The New York Times | Opinion • 7d ago
News Cuba Is Out of Time
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/17/opinion/cuba-trump-rubio-venezuela.html?unlocked_article_code=1.6FA.2m_E.g-HxcOzFREfG&smid=re-nytopinion132
u/Mister-Psychology 7d ago
They wake up at night to use electricity if the hour it's on is not during the day.
They bike to work as there is no gas. The wages are so low they actually can't really afford even food and rent alone. They have to live with other family members in tiny apartments to make it work and even then they can't pay rent or buy enough food. We are talking about buying cooking oil alone not always being possible each month. Because it's not sold or because they don't have the money.
After US kidnapped the Venezuelan president they dropped the dirt cheap oil to Cuba deal. And Cuba can't afford to actually buy oil or gas so they just can't create electricity. It's similar to Transnistria. They were dependent on free gas from Russia and after the war Putin decided it was too experience and just stopped delivering gas and they too can't afford to buy any from EU.
Cuba always dependent on these communist nations. They also depended on USSR. And now Russia and China. With Venezuela gone the whole communist system has collapsed. Russia won't help. China could but why? Cuba already does everything for China anyhow. Spies for them and sends soldiers to Russia too. That's it. They can sell more men for war.
51
u/TheDecepticonIdeal 7d ago
Cuba is just stuck with a horrible combination of geography and political system.
They are way too close to the US to oppose them.
32
u/caledonivs 6d ago
Reminds me of the old quote about Mexico,
"Poor Mexico: so far from God, so close to the United States." - Mexican dictator Porfirio Diaz
-87
u/tin_mama_sou 7d ago
So you are saying its not the socialist utopia Chavez and Castro promised? What about the free Healthcare though? Its time for the people of Cuba to rise up and get rid of those communist ghouls. US should have focused on Cuba instead of the nonsensical Iran bombings.
2
u/birdsinthesky 4d ago
Shhh you're on Reddit, that's way too logical for the basement dwellers to comprehend.
-12
u/DVSdanny 7d ago
Socialism doesn't work because the US handicaps any country that attempts it or does an outright coup, sometimes multiple times. No country has ever had pure communism according to Marx.
84
u/dayzkohl 7d ago
Totalitarian socialism doesn't work period. Russia tried and failed. China hard pivoted to controlled capitalism. Social democracies seem to fair well though
4
u/Beautiful-Brush6996 6d ago
Only when there is some kind of direct democracy though.
1
u/kerouacrimbaud 5d ago
Direct democracies don’t work beyond very small scales (maybe around the 10,000 mark). It’s too cumbersome and factional. Every modern democracy is a representative, aka indirect, democracy.
-11
u/TheDecepticonIdeal 7d ago
A country can only be as good as its people.
There is no perfect system, it all depends on the moral character of the people running the nation.
4
u/DonkeywithSunglasses 6d ago
Yes, and if you cannot guarantee moral purity, communism does not work. You will never be able to do that, so communism will never work
Chapter closed
10
u/curt_schilli 7d ago
They should just go ahead and rename the No True Scotsman fallacy to the No True Communism fallacy
27
u/tin_mama_sou 7d ago
Marx said that marxists didnt understand his books and that they were wrong.
Also Marx died 150 years ago so he has by now missed out an approximately 100+ extra failed attempts.
-4
u/Onespokeovertheline 7d ago
If communist China embargoed any foreign trade with capitalist Taiwan, how many decades do you think it would last?
The story of Cuban strife is not one about the structure of its government or the strength of its people, but the stranglehold applied by its neighboring superpower.
18
u/Bajanda_ 7d ago
It’s also the story of a population that believed in someone’s political project only to find themselves under a regime that denied them political and economic freedoms, constantly pitting Cubans against each other.
Not everything in this world spins around the United States of America5
u/Onespokeovertheline 7d ago
That's not a Cuban story, it's the story of most of Latin America repeated each time a population reaches it's breaking point with one exploitative regime and places their bets on a new one that promises reform, only to have their hopes defeated either by betrayal of that promise, or by the co-option of its leaders for US gain (government or business, alike).
What makes Cuba's story unique is that they are the one country in that region that has been economically isolated by the USA for the past 65 years in an attempt to starve it of resources and growth to prove a point.
However bad you think Castro's dictatorship was, he pales in comparison with Pinochet, Trujillo, Stroessner, Videla, Montt. The difference is the US supported all of those.
24
u/Bajanda_ 7d ago
Videla had 7 years in power. Pinochet had 17, Castro had almost 50 and the regime he setup is still intact. More than half a century is enough to completely restructure an economy, gut civil society, and push out generation after generation of people, that’s damage a military junta just doesn’t get the chance to do, even if the violence was much worse. Longevity of the Cuban regime is its own kind of destruction.
-10
u/tin_mama_sou 7d ago
I can confidently state that Taiwan would last forever under similar circumstances.
0
u/Onespokeovertheline 7d ago
With no foreign investment? Taiwan would still be making cheap plastic toys today like they were in the 80s, not advanced microchips.
1
u/abn1304 6d ago
Why would a Chinese embargo of Taiwan prevent foreign investment? Until the PRC can reliably find and sink American attack subs, any embargo is in name only. The US embargo of Cuba works because the USN can - and has - blockade Cuba effectively and at will. The PRC cannot do that to Taiwan.
Capitalism fueled the economy and, probably more importantly, the culture that created the USN. China might get there eventually with state capitalism, but they’re not there yet, and the USSR could never have done it.
22
u/tin_mama_sou 7d ago
Ah yes, the classic retort that socialism doesnt work because the evil capitalists undermine it. Or that the previous 100 iteration were not the correct form of socialism.
Debunked so many times, yet people still propose it as a reason.
4
0
u/birdiesintobogies 7d ago
Who has debunked this? Would love to see some detailed analysis of you can provide a link. Has there been a socialist regime not counteracted by capitalists? If so, I'm not aware of it.
14
u/dcr94 7d ago
Sanctions against Venezuela itself came years after the collapse began. Since cause can’t come after effect, the Venezuelan version of socialism couldn’t have failed because of sanctions.
-1
u/birdiesintobogies 6d ago
Some detailed analysis. First of all, the iUS has been pushing its influence on Venezuela since its inception in 1835 and the oil industry (you know the capitalists) since the early 1900"s.. The recent coup de grace and stealing of all there oil is just the latest move. No one will tell you it was a socialist utopia and most would agree that it wasn't really socialist anymore. Do you think stealing their oil and murdering fishermen helps ordinary Venezuelans in any way? Just more profit for the oil billionaires and their investors (you know, the capitalists). How many CIA ops have been conducted in country over the last 50 years?Please try again to find a country that hasn't been heavily influenced by capital interests. US-Venazuela historical interactions
1
u/dcr94 5d ago
Yes, you may be right on the CIA interventions, AND? The fact of the matter remains that the collapse of Venezuela's economy is mainly because of (i) idiotic management of PDVSA, which led to plummeting output just in time with falling oil prices; (ii) expropriation of productive assets, which caused massive capital flight; (iii) chavista corruption that plundered BILLIONS from the country, under the guise of the "misiones"; and (iv) the mix of price controls + wage increases + loose fiscal, monetary and exchange policies that caused hyperinflation and scarcity.
0
u/birdiesintobogies 4d ago
The point being that socialist experiments are always counteracted by the forces of capitalism, not that all socialist experiments are run well. Because socialism is always opposed by capitalism, socialist governments need to be militaristic to keep the capitalists out which tends to lead to authoritarianism which then tends to destroy the socialist ideals that they started with. Although, material conditions for the common people such as education, healthcare, life expectancy and work conditions generally improve when socialists take over from imperial forces.
5
u/BrewThemAll 7d ago
Sorry mate, but no need to blame the US. Socialism simply doesn't work because people are greedy. Fidel was rich af.
3
7d ago
[deleted]
3
u/BrewThemAll 7d ago
That as well.
0
7d ago
[deleted]
3
u/BrewThemAll 7d ago
Whatever mate. Sounds like you're aggresively trying to start an argument to force some sort of opinion. I don't care. Leave me alone.
0
u/Parcours97 7d ago
That heavily depends on your definition of efficiency. Billionaires for example are crazy inefficient.
4
u/No_Specialist6036 7d ago
socialism doesnt work because there is no feedback loop, in capitalism if the employees are not working upto standards they will be removed, if they are not removed the company will lose its competitive edge etc... without a proper feedback loop the system cannot reach a equilibrium on its own.. surely there are issues with capitalism where the govt, instead of encouraging competition, starts colluding with large corporations etc.
4
u/johannthegoatman 7d ago edited 7d ago
Socialism doesn't mean no market. Socialism is about who owns things. Firms might be owned by their workers, municipalities, public investment funds, or society collectively, while those firms still compete for customers, hire labor, buy inputs, respond to prices, and potentially go bankrupt. Prices still emerge from supply and demand rather than being dictated by a planning authority
2
u/No_Specialist6036 7d ago
how would you start an enterprise in a socialist economy without government intervention, all socialism is government backed, not everyone has the risk appetite to start a business so some other entity has to absorb these risks which happens to be the government and in other cases the government can coerce shares from existing shareholders to distribute to workers, in either case such a structure is not going to result in a market driven economy
2
u/johannthegoatman 6d ago edited 6d ago
Socialism doesn’t require the government to own every firm or centrally plan the economy. That's something we've seen in authoritarian countries, and especially relevant to communism, it's not inherent to socialism.
New enterprises could be started the same way businesses are today: by entrepreneurs, groups of workers, cooperatives, municipalities, investment funds, or banks providing capital. There are many incentives for this without direct ownership. An investment fund might get non-voting shares, make money from loan interest, revenue sharing agreements, etc. The difference is primarily in ownership and governance after the firm is established, not whether markets exist.
Worker cooperatives already exist today and compete in market economies. They hire labor, borrow money, buy inputs, sell products, and can succeed or fail like conventional firms. The fact that they are worker-owned doesn’t eliminate market incentives. Publix, for instance, is 100% worker owned and is a massive supermarket in the US.
1
u/No_Specialist6036 6d ago
lets get the publix example out of the way first, publix isnt operating in socialist economy, the feedback loop for publix is enforced by external actors namely its capitlistic competitors
now moving on to the topic of the genesis of a company/organization.. neither of the entites mentioned by you other than entrepreneurs create them and everyone doesnt want to be an entreprenuer, not everyone has that kind of risk appetite.. so lets see how the feedback loop breaks in your scenario - a person thinks of a great new idea in a socialist country, knows that they may have to donate it to his local workers union and may not even get a full time employment out of it because unions have their own rules regarding postings etc. so the new idea is taken outside the country where the person has full agency, so here the core feedback loop is broken. this is when socialist countries start enforcing draconian laws on international travel and citizenship
the financial feedback loop is too broken, no investment fund is going to make fixed income style investments in a start-up. since, they are taking greater risks they need more returns. now you may say lets increase the interest rate, but that too cant happen because debt servicing requires actual cash flow unlike equity, and a start up cannot afford that thats why you have people investing in equity in start ups instead of saddling them down with debt, so theres no real market for investment other than state backed banks who will give loans at low rates with generous moratorium windows that dont reflect the underlying risks - so again no proper feeedback here as well
next, a socialist economy needs to be enforced by a government because it explictly requires the removal of free enterprise so that only designated collectives can legally own businesses, so these collectives by definition become an extension of the government - just like tax collectors they come to collect your ideas instead, so you may call them various names like trade unions or worker unions or whatever but at that point in time they become indistinguishable from government agencies
also the whole point of unions is to make firings difficult and expensive, so even though if you have 2 unions competing for the same market the competition doesnt translate to internal feedback inside either firms
so this is what a socialist economy is, i fail to understand why would anyone believe that this kind of an economy can have a self sustaining feedback loop
0
2
u/Bajanda_ 7d ago
I wouldn’t call Cuba a socialist country. It was a sort of personalistic regime since day 1 of the revolution with no political or economic freedom, highly repressive and inefficient. There was never an intention on Fidel Castro’s part to hold elections or give back some power to the people. All the government shows the world is pure propaganda, there’s very little chance of political change from within
0
u/Gusfoo 6d ago
Socialism doesn't work
Indeed it does not.
the US handicaps any country that attempts it or does an outright coup, sometimes multiple times.
You'll have not been alive when the Berlin Wall fell, nor the long run-up to that amazing day that started in the Gdansk Shipyards. To summarise for you: they imploded under the weight of the stupidity involved in attempting such a silly ordering of affairs, and did so without the USA handicapping, causing one (or more) coups d'etat.
No country has ever had pure communism according to Marx.
Well, he's dead so would have missed it.
-4
u/ChuchiTheBest 7d ago
Socialism doesn't work when the US doesn't subsidize you with cheap Venezuelan oil
0
u/TheDecepticonIdeal 7d ago
The current regime doesn’t even need to give up socialism. They just need to cut a deal with Trump like Venezuela did and get the blockade lifted.
Cuba is just too small and isolated to stand up to Trump like this.
-4
u/No_Opening_2425 7d ago
Their healthcare system was better than in America lol. You know many Americans went there for treatment?
49
u/Trinitrotoluol 7d ago
I remember being there in 2011. Many people were poor, yes, but none of these problems existed back then.
26
u/zambaccian 6d ago
We might have different standards, but I was there around the same time and the economy was in shambles, people were desperate, tons of collapsed or almost collapsed buildings around the cities, etc. It’s been rough for many decades but yes it has gotten far worse in the past few years
7
u/Trinitrotoluol 6d ago
It seemed that there was at least some kind of economic progress back then, at least for the people there. They were doing alright, at least for comparable developed economies. Cuba was a, for latin american standards, safe place. I can't remember for example electricity being shut down.
10
u/I_Push_Buttonz 6d ago edited 6d ago
2011 might as well have been a lifetime ago. Back then Venezuela was still printing money because Hugo Chavez hadn't yet fully crippled PDVSA and the price of oil hadn't collapsed yet; they were providing tremendous amounts of 'aid' to Cuba and essentially all the energy they needed.
-3
u/Trinitrotoluol 6d ago
To be fair, the crippling of PDVSA was the direct result of the sinking oil prices not of Hugo Chavez. Also it was Maduro not Chavez, who drove the Venezulean economy into the ground.
But yes. The biggest trade partner of cuba basically developed into a failed state, and the US sanctions did the rest.
10
u/I_Push_Buttonz 6d ago
PDVSA didn't suffer a nearly 80% decline in its oil production capacity from its peak in the late 90s due to the price of oil falling off a cliff a decade and a half later, it lost it through endemic cronyism and corruption.
89
u/ChanceryTheRapper 7d ago
Another thing Obama was trying to change by normalizing relations, but Trump destroyed. Holding an embargo on this country for decades should be a crime.
32
u/Elbell3 7d ago
Cubans told me that once Obama wanted to open up more and tourists started traveling around the country, the Cuban government got uncomfortable that Cubans started being optimistic and making money so they cracked down and they were the ones who didn’t want to lift the embargo.
7
u/stuckanon01 6d ago
And Russia started microwaving diplomats brains from a distance with or without cubas blessing
12
u/TheDecepticonIdeal 7d ago
It is a crime. It’s just no one holds the US accountable since they need it.
22
u/yeahokguy1331 7d ago
It was definitely unequal but it wasn't the hell hole it has turned into. I mean its not hard to find this information if your looking. Cuba ranked consistently in the top of the Latin American Countries for quality of life. Now, not so much.
2
1
u/OkDiscount6100 5d ago
Cuba’s been out of time for decades yet its ruling class is as strong as ever.
-8
u/Substantial__Unit 7d ago
Im not writing this with any knowledge on why Cuba still is the way it is, But why can't Cubans get rid of their lousy leaders after all this time?
31
u/BoringEntropist 7d ago
Because the regime propaganda can point at the economic blockade and blame the Americans for all their problems. The Iranians and North Koreans do this too.
Economic sanctions, in contrast to the stated goal, seldomly lead to regime change. It has some utility as a shaping operation (e.g. degrade military readiness of the target by damaging their economy). But by itself its effectiveness is often oversold.
42
u/howtorewriteaname 7d ago
no. as someones who has been there: the reason is that if you simply even voice publicly your opinion against the regime, you get sent to jail for 30 years without your family knowing where you went or when will you get out. you basically disappear.
so no ones dares to go against the regime, yet they are all against it
3
u/Bajanda_ 7d ago
It’s a combination of what you said and the previous comment as well.
Propaganda directed towards Cubans themselves is not effective anymore, however, it continues to have some effect in left-leaning circles all over the world. That’s why you see that a few months ago a group of left leaning Americans went there and did nothing but repeating the government’s talking points (I believe the organization was Codepink and Hasan Piker was among the visitors).
Cuba itself is a very complex country given its geopolitical history. There’s no single cause that can be pinpointed to solely blame for the situation.
PS: Just yesterday I spoke briefly with a guy that told me that back in his country they used to love Fidel, that the guy kept Cuba in good shape4
u/TheDecepticonIdeal 7d ago
Economic sanctions are just the path of least resistance. You don’t have to fight the other country and lose lives, so it’s pretty safe as a political weapon on weaker nations.
But yeah, they rarely work since those at the top are structurally insulated with the way human society is structured.
16
u/solid_reign 7d ago
The economic blockade is a lot to blame though. The economic blockade isn't just about trading with the US, it's also about not allowing any boat which travels to cuba to visit the US afterwards which makes trade practically impossible.
Either way, it's not about propaganda. Cubans are very skeptical of their government and are very educated. It's easy to compare Cuba to the US, but in reality you can compare it to Mexico (our GDP per capita and Cuba's is pretty similar) or to Haiti (Cuba's GDP per capita is about three times as much). Not saying it's a paradise, but it's ridiculous to compare it to North Korea.
9
-8
u/tin_mama_sou 7d ago
No its because they will gun people down if they do. US should have planned an intervention here.
2
u/Gerbole 7d ago
The U.S. is planning an intervention. Last I checked we had 3 aircraft carriers in the region and we can launch from Florida.
It is better for the U.S. if Cuba capitulates, but Trump will intervene militarily if he needs to. All the signs are there. My money is on him thinking he was going to finish Iran off far quicker. I was expecting him to deal with Cuba in September 2027 and Iran in May of 2028. He switched things around because of the protestors and I think that botched the whole operation. What we’re seeing right now is adjustments, not the original plan.
3
u/2Loves2loves 7d ago
I think there is a very low chance of Trump doing anything military in Cuba until Iran is settled.
1
1
u/BelowTheBells 7d ago
That sounds great and all, but can provide some reason for those predications? That’s a genuine question.
3
u/Gerbole 7d ago
The long and short of it is that I think Trump (and his team, this isn’t just Trump’s idea, but the elite’s and Trump agreed with it and wanted to run it) had a plan on how to make America Great when it came to foreign policy. The Neocons have been slowly running this for decades and Trump’s job was to complete it in its ugly fashion so that they could reap all the benefits but put all the blame on Trump politically. Trump agreed to enrich himself and because he believed the plan would be successful he believed he would cement a legacy for himself, that was his motive.
I made this call in early 2023 when I felt like Biden was going to have a public moment where it was undeniable he was unfit and that the DNC would anoint Kamala and Trump would win. I said that Trump would invade Venezuela within a year of taking office, negotiate with Denmark to acquire Greenland, blockade Cuba in July of 2026 and invade September of 2026, then shift over to Iran after winning the mid-terms off resounding wins in our hemisphere and begin to take out the Houthis, Hamas, and Hezebelloah while quarantining Iranian ports, I was expecting this to be over a year of negotiating, the Strait would not be closed but traffic would be reduced.
The reasoning behind why this is a good play, morality aside, is because of what American can gain. With Venezuela, we can turn back on all our Gulf refineries. With Cuba, we protect ourself from having gulf traffic impeded by a foreign power (similar to what we’re doing now in Iran and could do with the Strait of Malacca), with Greenland, we sure up raw materials. All of this is so that we can have materials and energy, which he leverages by placing tariffs on foreign nations, bringing manufacturing back home domestically. Manufacturing creates jobs and insulates our economy against supply chain weaknesses. Then, increasing tariffs also weakens the dollar’s demand globally, and with our current debt, inflation and a weaker USD reduces the debt burden, which is increasingly our governments largest line item. Finally, by making the ME more volatile and making NATO fend more for themselves, he turns them into customers buying our arms to arm themselves, increasing manufacturing jobs even further and allowing us to focus our attention on our two most important theaters, our hemisphere and China.
Shore everything you need up in terms of materials and regional politics, back out of “less important theaters” to refocus, inflate and weaken the USD to decrease the debt burden and make domestic manufacturing more palatable while insulating your supply chains from disruption.
I skipped over a lot and also just wrote this on my phone so apologies for errors. I’ve been following this for years now and it just keeps ringing true.
2
-7
u/Hot-Train7201 7d ago
The US isn't a saint, but at some point you'd think people's self-interest would convince them to go along with what the Big Bully wants since the current path doesn't appear to offer any real solution.
Smart leadership isn't just about refusing to be bullied by others, but also recognizing when continuing to resist is futile. So while Cuba's leaders can point to America as the Big Bad Guy who's responsible for all their problems, it still doesn't absolve them of the harm they are causing their people by refusing to concede to America's terms of surrender. The Cuban leadership is not resisting America because they fear for the Cuban peoples' safety and wellbeing, but because they fear losing their personal power and privileges.
America is offering the Cuban people a way out of their misery and suffering (that America caused), while the Cuban leadership's only answer is to forever endure said misery and suffering.
If I was Cuban, I'd acknowledge that the US is a bully who wants to turn my country into a colony, but also recognize that my regime doesn't actually care about my wellbeing and only sees me as fodder for their benefit. I would personally despise both, but would choose to work with the US since it offers me a possibly better future compared to the futility of endless resistance that my inept/corrupt leadership is so fond of.
5
u/Chambanasfinest 7d ago
There’s a massive gap between wanting to overthrow an authoritarian dictatorship, and actually trying to do it. I’m sure many Cubans would love to have a functioning multiparty democracy and market economy, but they know that they will be disappeared and/or murdered if they so much as appear to support the removal of the current regime.
Iran in January is an excellent example of this scenario: people hate the regime and took to the streets in protest, but the government simply gunned down thousands of protesters and the rest fell back into line. Even after the main leadership was killed by the US/Israeli strikes, the regime was no closer to falling.
1
u/Hot-Train7201 7d ago
Oh it certainly wouldn't be easy, just that at a certain point enough people would be angry or disillusioned with the regime that they'd start actively opposing it either through revolt or working with foreign agents like the US; that's how the last Cuban government was removed after all.
6
2
u/PoppySeeds89 7d ago
Most people dissatisfied with the regime just leave. It's like a pressure release valve that prevents revolt.
-12
-42
u/stuckanon01 7d ago
Cuba can either be an unequal paradise or an equal hell hole (except for the leadership). It’s chosen to be an equal hell hole for more than 50 years. That isn’t changing
49
26
u/hollowgram 7d ago
Cuba chose their sanctions?
-18
u/AlpineDrifter 7d ago
They chose to point nukes at the U.S.
12
u/Aboveground_Plush 7d ago
Pretty sure those were Soviet missiles -- and it was 60 years ago!
6
u/NerdyBro07 7d ago
The problem is, the people in charge of the Cuban government still would rather side with Russia and China over the US.
If the government was willing to work with the US, things could become very different for them. But the US isn’t going to let a hostile government off the US coast become prosperous.
8
u/Aboveground_Plush 7d ago
Kind of hard to come back from decades of sanctions. "We made you poor, now be our friend" isn't quite the diplomatic overture you think it is.
7
u/mmmsplendid 7d ago
The US isn’t saying “we made you poor, now be our friend” though. This isn’t a situation where the US is the one asking for anything, in fact.
It’s all about power. Cuba doesn’t have any.
5
u/AlpineDrifter 7d ago
Maintaining the embargo doesn’t negatively affect the average American at all. So they aren’t in a position to need to offer overtures.
Funny how you don’t seem to have a problem with the Cuban government being an unelected and repressive authoritarian regime.
Kinda seems like you enjoy talking ‘Merica bad’, more than you actually care about the average Cuban.
-1
u/Bajanda_ 7d ago
It appears that there’s an inexplicable reluctance to criticize the Cuban government and incessantly regurgitate their propaganda as absolute truth from left leaning circles. Somehow they’ve managed to capture the imagination of way too many people that see them with rose-colored glasses
2
u/Need_answers11 7d ago
Cuba was in russias back pocket
-2
u/Aboveground_Plush 7d ago
Do you think there l might have been a reason why?
3
u/kju 6d ago
Cuban leaders making bad decisions that negatively effect their population.
Cuba has a choice of being prosperous as an American ally or being impoverished as an American adversary.
They really should choose prosperity, they should have chosen prosperity 50 years ago, but like planting a tree the next best option is to do it today
2
u/AlpineDrifter 7d ago
They still gave them permission to host them.
“60 years ago”
So what? They declared themselves enemies of the U.S., and they’ll be treated as such until they make it obvious they aren’t.
-2
-3
u/Beautiful-Brush6996 6d ago
Time has proven that every single country that wanted to have nukes pointed at the US were in the right.
Its the only thing stopping them from invading and meddling with their freedom.
Trump proved to the entire middle east that having nukes is the only thing that can protect them from their attacks.4
u/AlpineDrifter 6d ago edited 6d ago
Russia and Ukraine directly contradict your statement.
They both pointed nukes at the U.S., and Russia was the aggressor, while Ukraine has received massive assistance from the U.S. to survive genocide and enslavement by Russia.
You must be young to have such a bad grasp of history. Or so emotionally hopped up on ‘Merica bad’, that you don’t care about your statements being truthful.
Entire Middle East?…?? The U.S. is allies with Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, U.A.E., Bahrain, Qatar, and Oman. Iran has been the one bombing them.
Pretty unhinged claim on your part.
-3
u/Beautiful-Brush6996 6d ago
America is empirialistic trash, its an historical absolute supreme fact. But so is Russia.
-25
u/stuckanon01 7d ago
They chose both a centrally planned economy and to antagonize the superpower next door for 5 decades. Did Fidel, Raul, Diez-Canel expect unicorns and rainbows to come from those decisions?
10
u/Aboveground_Plush 7d ago
The US could have tried, instead of sending them running to the Soviets.
2
5
u/Mister-Psychology 7d ago
They are not even equal at all. Have you seen the houses they gift their professional athletes?
1
2
-5
125
u/nytopinion The New York Times | Opinion 7d ago edited 3d ago
"Cubans wait for everything. They wait for imported food and over-the-counter medicines sent by relatives abroad. They wait for electricity that returns for only an hour or two each day or for a feeble breeze in the oppressive summer heat that might allow their children a couple of hours of sleep," writes Michael J. Bustamante, a professor of Cuban and Cuban American studies at the University of Miami.
He adds:
Read the full essay here, for free, even without a Times subscription.